What happens when practitioners of a half-baked behavioral science make it an applied science? The rest of the world feels the effects. Thus world-wide economic distress on the back of applied economics, in the form of financial speculation.

Ironically, economics (unlike history, polysci, anthropology etc.) has an extensive foundation of mathematical models. Which unfortunately don’t work. They don’t predict or explain or describe the real world. Like string theory, they are somewhat baseless, desperate attempts to imagine what is the case. An oddity in the behavioral sciences, which are usually relentlessly, perfectionistically in pursuit of accurate details, and gun shy around big picture models.

Are economists too self-important to find commonality with other behavioral scientists, to be affected by biology, ecology, and theories of human nature? Much less the nature of other social species?

Physicist Lee Smolin describes the difficulty of advancing baseless economics models:



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s